the arizona law enforcement officials do not enforce this law in a manner that undermines the civil rights of americans as the court s decision recognizes. the supreme court, what could happen is they could wind up taking up this provision down the road. but right now, it s up to the state courts to determine whether the practice is unconstitutional. republican governor jan brewer jumped into space-saving mode late this afternoon. the law she champions basically got smoked by the supreme court. she put on a happy face today. the heart of senate bill 1070 has been proven to be constitutional. arizona and every other state s inherent authority to protect did and defend its people has been upheld. brewer was inflectixible abo questions by reporters. she was asked about the majority of provisions being struck down but brewer didn t stray from her script. today, the state of arizona and senate bill 1070 was vindicated and the heart of the bill was upheld. i believe we have accomplishe
obama was not enforcing. and court told them today they can t do that. it is, it s disheartening. let s bring in joan walsh of salon.com, michael medved, and author and torn attorney catherine crier. where do i start? what happens to balls and strikes. katherine crier, we ll ask you. is this the most opinionated we have seen a judge? he s always great fun because there s no question that scalia is a very intelligent man and he can write very powerful, i don t mean they re legally appropriate, but powerful cases, powerful dissents, but when you look at his varying positions, he argues his originalism, and then he says, we re talking about state sovereignty, and state sovereignty s fine when we re talking about the right wing position on immigration but if we re talking about campaign finance reform, maybe it s federal. if we re talking about marijuana, medical marijuana laws, maybe it s federal.
this decision is corporate rights yes, states rights no. you talk about elitism, governor schweitzer made this point very well. you ve got a bunch of legal theorists on the supreme court telling a state that s had a system that s worked for 100 years, they ve got to cast it aside because it doesn t fit with their theory. that s a terrible idea. and it s totally against conservative principles, conservatives are supposed to rely on practical local experience. this is a radical court doing a radical thing. radical court for sure. here s the white house statement. citizens united was wrong when it was decided and as two supreme court justices have observed since, independent expenditures by corporations are threatening the health of our democracy. unfortunately, the court today missed an opportunity to correct that mistake. this is kind of a wake-up call to america. if we as a people believe that all voices should be heard in a
misdemeanor for not carrying identification saying whether or not you re a legal citizen. arizona can t make it a crime for undocumented immigrants to apply for a job. many think that s a civil rights issue. law enforcement cannot arrest someone based on suspecting the person is in the country illegally. but the ruling also keeps in tact the most controversial part of the law, the papers please provision. allowing law enforcement to check the immigration status of people they detain. president obama said in a statement he was pleased with the overall ruling but also concerned. the controversial provision is still alive. going forward, we must ensure the arizona law enforcement officials do not enforce this law in a manner that undermines the civil rights of americans as the court s decision recognizes. the supreme court, what could happen is they could wind up
accommodation, integration, and working toward a solution on immigration, he s caught between pandering and not knowing what to do. he s in the same boat he was in the beginning, and all of us in our community realize he has no solution and he has no ideas about what to do about this. and congressman, finally, there are other states that are involved in this. you know, georgia, alabama, indiana, south carolina, other states that have tried to go down this road of passing immigration laws. what do you think their response is going to be? to this supreme court ruling? where do you think they ll go from here? the brakes have been put on in the fact they can preempt the federal government immigration law. the brakes have not been put on in terms of that section which empowers local law enforcement. i hope those states realize this is about due process and the 14th amendment. they should wait for all those issues to be clarified before they turn loose an agenda that is only going to fur